9911796707
TMI BlogMeaning of words ‘repeal’ ‘substitute’ and ‘omission’X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... saurus (Deluxe Edition) by William C Burton, 1979 Edition. The expression delete is defined by the Thesaurus as follows: Delete: - Blot out, cancel, censor, cross off, cross out, cut, cut out, dele, discard, do away with, drop, edit out, efface, elide, eliminate, eradicate, erase, excise, expel, expunge, extirpate, get rid of, leave out, modify by excisions, obliterate, omit, remove, rub out, rule out, scratch out, strike off, take out, weed wipe out. Likewise the expression omit is also defined by this Thesaurus as follows:- Omit: - Abstain from inserting, bypass, cast aside, count out, cut out, delete, discard, dodge, drop exclude, exclude, fail to do, fail to include, fail to insert, fail to mention, leave out, leave undone, let go, let ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... beginning, whereas an omission is only in futuro. If the expression delete would amount to a repeal , which the appellant s counsel does not deny, it is clear that a conjoint reading of Halsbury s Laws of England and the Legal Thesaurus cited hereinabove both lead to the same result, namely that an omission being tantamount to a deletion is a form of repeal. [ M/s. Shree Bhagwati Steel Rolling Mills Versus Commissioner of Central Excise Another ] As per section 6 of the General Clauses Act 1897 - Effect of repeal. Where this Act, or any Central Act or Regulation made after the commencement of this Act, repeals any enactment hitherto made or hereafter to be made, then, unless a different intention appears, the repeal shall not-- (a) revive a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fails, it is totally ineffective so as to leave intact what was sought to be displaced. That seems to us to be the ordinary and natural meaning of the words 'shall be substituted'. [BHAGAT RAM SHARMA VERSUS. UNION OF INDIA ORS- 1987 (11) TMI 378 - SUPREME COURT] The Apex Court in the case of Kolhapur Canesugar Works Ltd., Vs. Union of India [2000 (2) TMI 823 - SUPREME COURT] , held that- section 6 of the General Clauses Act only applies to repeals and not to omissions, and applies when the repeal is of a Central Act or Regulation and not as a Rule. It was further clarified by the Apex Court that in such a case the court is to look to the provisions in the rule which has been introduced after omission of the previous rule to determin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... during the currency of the Act will not apply to omission of a provision in an Act but only to repeal, omission being different from repeal as held in the aforesaid decisions. Uttam Energy Ltd. Vs ACIT, [2024 (8) TMI 37 - ITAT PUNE] - held that as per the rule of precedence , we have to follow the decision of Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Texport Overseas P Ltd. [ 2019 (12) TMI 1312 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ] . In M/S. Raipur steel casting India (P) Ltd, M/S. Srinath ji furnishing Pvt. limited V/s P.C.I.T., [ 2020 (6) TMI 629 - ITAT KOLKATA ] - held that- An omission of a provision is different from a repeal and section 6 of the General Clauses Act applies to a repealed law and not to omission of law, therefore section 6 of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
